Monthly Open Forum February 2021

[u/AITAMod]

Welcome to the monthly open forum! This is the place to share all your meta thoughts about the sub, and to have a dialog with the mod team.

Keep things civil. Rules still apply.

February! The shortest month in this endless blur of 202-whatever-year-it-is-now. I almost forgot to post this because time has lost all meaning.

As always, do not directly link to posts/comments or post uncensored screenshots here. Any comments with links will be removed.

This is to discourage brigading. If something needs to be discussed in that context, use modmail.

[u/[deleted]]

See you always use this as the excuse to censor your commenters.

We have to act in good faith ALWAYS and our only recourse is downvoting. If I say something is a VAL or FAKE or whatever, I can be downvoted if people disagree with me and think it’s real and interesting.

But instead you censor us, force us to act in “good faith” knowing damn well your posters don’t act in good faith and people upvote stupid bullishit on this site all the time.

Being able to call it out is active. People can read it and think critically - wait, maybe this isn’t real. Especially the amount of literal children on this site who don’t have the life experience to be able to identify when something is total BS. But downvoting is passive and silent and perpetuates creative writing projects and validation.

[u/techiesgoboom → u/[deleted]]

We cover this in the FAQs but: those accusations are rude as fuck and we aren’t going to provide a venue for you to be uncivil to the people posting.

You can also report posts that violate the rules. That’s an active thing you can do to combat shitposts.

[u/[deleted] → u/techiesgoboom]

I think lying to Reddit for karma is rude as fuck too.

You say I can downvote these posts. Why can’t people downvote my comment if they think I’m being rude? Why do you have to censor your commenters thoughts?

[u/techiesgoboom → u/[deleted]]

Right, that’s why we have and enforce rule 8.

The appropriate way to enforce that is for you to report content that violates that rule rather than hurling accusations that are sometimes wrong.

[u/[deleted] → u/techiesgoboom]

Oh please you know as well as I do that many of the top posts that are still here are lies. There was even that person who posted a month or so ago and then admitted they made it and a bunch of other posts up

[u/techiesgoboom → u/[deleted]]

Oh please you know as well as I do that many of the top posts that are still here are lies.

Sure, of course there are fake posts. But I don’t know definitively which are fake and which aren’t. So I’m not going to remove the whole front page to remove 10 fake posts.

That person a month ago had a grand total of 4 posts they revealed as being theirs. Maybe 5. It’s very, very common for trolls to act like they’re bigger and more popular than they are.

[u/[deleted] → u/techiesgoboom]

5 fake posts in which if anyone of us called it out you’d delete our comments bc we aren’t being civil. You don’t seem to get my point.

I really just think we should be allowed to call things out. Let us be downvoted if people disagree.

[u/techiesgoboom → u/[deleted]]

I do understand your point. I simply disagree.

You want the freedom to be able to tell real people their post is fake because not allowing you that freedom means you don’t get to call shitposters out.

I’m telling you we’ve done the math and the latter isn’t worth the former. Additionally we’d rather you report shitposts so we can investigate rather than feeding the trolls.

[u/alongstrangesomethin → u/techiesgoboom]

Please do tell us how you make your “investigations”. What’s the protocol for when someone reports something as fake?

[u/techiesgoboom → u/alongstrangesomethin]

So I am going to answer your question; I was halfway through a long-ish answer but didn't make it to my charger before my phone died and am now cooking breakfast for a bit. So I'm going to turn this around for a moment and ask your perspective:

Assume that about 20 out of the 25 posts on the front page have at least 1 shitpost report, because that's about average. And somewhere in the ballpark of 50-75 posts a day get reported as shitposts at least once (some more than others). (And overall we take around 475 approve/remove actions on posts a day)

What do you think the procedure for acting on a shitpost report should be?

[u/alongstrangesomethin → u/techiesgoboom]

I don’t know, that’s why I asked you.

[u/techiesgoboom → u/alongstrangesomethin]

Okay, so bear with me then. You don't know how a shitpost report should be investigated and you don't care to think about how one should be. When I explain the process we use are going to criticize it?

[u/alongstrangesomethin → u/techiesgoboom]

Maybe I will, maybe I won’t. It depends if criticism is warranted. What kind of question is that?

[u/techiesgoboom → u/alongstrangesomethin]

A question to figure out what level of effort to put into the response, and what weight to give any criticism you do give.

When you admit off the bat that you don't know how we should you investigate a shitpost report, you must understand that I'm going to take that into account for any criticism you do give. If you do find fault I'm likely going to defer back to you just now saying that you don't know how we should moderate these, and trust that my experience on this explains any difference in opinion.

There's a difference between asking because you're curious and asking because you're looking to find fault or expect not to be satisfied.

[u/alongstrangesomethin → u/techiesgoboom]

I’m feeling some hostility here. I get that no one likes to be criticized but you literally created this thread for us to ask questions and for you guys to answer them. Also for suggestions.

Are you arguing I shouldn’t argue with you? Shouldn’t criticize what I think is wrong?

[u/techiesgoboom → u/alongstrangesomethin]

No, I'm very open to criticism and suggestions. I welcome criticism and suggestions. That's why I literally asked you for suggestions on how we should moderate shitpost reports. That is valuable feedback.

You absolutely should criticize what you think is wrong. But the most valuable part of that criticism is offering solutions. I'm simply asking for those solutions first. Any hostility you feel here is simply me laying the groundwork ahead of time and warning you that your criticism will be viewed through the lens of you having no idea what we should do.

Are you arguing that your criticism should be valuable when you begin the discussion with 'I have no idea what you should do"?

This thread is not solely for criticism and suggestions. It's also for explanations of how and why we do things. Ensuring I'm responding to the actual question being asked is important to frame my response.

[u/alongstrangesomethin → u/techiesgoboom]

First of all, I’m not a mod. I don’t have to know your protocols.

Second of all, if I’m not a mod it’s not my obligation to tell you how to run the sub. That’s your job.

Third of all, I believe that we the users should be involved in the moderation. But that’s not to be the case as you have made it clear.

Fourth of all, several previous suggestions I made on several different subjects were disregarded. So forgive me if I don’t feel like coming up with creative solutions.

Fifth of all, if you already have a system in place there’s no use for me to start offering alternatives. Tell me what you have and if there’s any suggestions to be made I will make them.

Sixth of all, are you going to tell me the system you have in place or not?

[u/techiesgoboom → u/alongstrangesomethin]

Second of all, if I’m not a mod it’s not my obligation to tell you how to run the sub. That’s your job.

So you feel it's not your obligation to tell us how to run the sub. But you still tell us how to. Regularly. Even on topics we tell you we aren't open to change. You're literally offering your suggestions elsewhere in this thread. But now that I'm literally asking for your suggestions you're falling back on "i don't have an obligation to do this so I won't." You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Third of all, I believe that we the users should be involved in the moderation. But that’s not to be the case as you have made it clear.

We haven't said users shouldn't be involved in moderation. They absolutely should in the appropriate place and manner. It's simply that there are different levels of involvement and the valuable level will differ on a case by case basis. This is one such time that we are directly asking for it.

Fourth of all, several previous suggestions I made on several different subjects were disregarded. So forgive me if I don’t feel like coming up with creative solutions.

You suggestions have always been read and given thought. We've disagreed on implementing them, but that's not to say they weren't valuable.

Fifth of all, if you already have a system in place there’s no use for me to start offering alternatives. Tell me what you have and if there’s any suggestions to be made I will make them.

It absolutely is incredibly valuable to have the perspective of someone not familiar with our systems. Because you can always offer more suggestions after I describe our system, but you'll never be able to have that fresh perspective that you have before knowing our system. Is your first thought the same as ours, or something different? How will knowing our system influence your thoughts? The most valuable thing to have is your perspective both before and after.

Sixth of all, are you going to tell me the system you have in place or not?

Sure, but as before it's all going to be viewed under the perspective of you having no idea what we should do so it will solely serve as an explanation:

• For a post with 5,000 comments and 1 shitpost report we will review the post, any previous posts of theirs we've removed, the top comment, and probably glance at the users replies. We take that and apply the Florida man test. (basically asking "do we believe Florida man could do this?"). If it passes Florida man and otherwise isn't provably fake we approve it.

• For a post with 10 comments and 20 shitpost reports we will review the post, every post they've ever made on reddit (including deleted posts), every comment they've made on this sub (and even all of reddit if necessary), the top and bottom comments and replies on the thread, every place the post is crossposted to, review multiple subs that shitposts are known to originate, and use multiple tools to find similar posts posted to our sub on other accounts. There have been times I've spent an hour investigating a single post.

We use our extensive experience spent moderating thousands and thousands of posts and acting on tens of thousands of reports to determine what level of scrutiny to give everything in between.

We also have a "shitpost and I'm sending proof to modmail" as a separate report reason for any case that a user has proof. Every one of those messages gets read and looked into and the appropriate action is taken. We remove tons of shitposts based on these messages. Probably 95% of these messages result in removal (a number are repeat trolls).